Summary

Elon Musk and his advisers are pressuring Trump to cancel NASA’s $24 billion Space Launch System (SLS), citing high costs and outdated technology.

GOP lawmakers from Alabama and Texas oppose the move due to job losses and national security concerns.

Critics favor SpaceX’s cheaper, reusable Starship, but supporters argue SLS has already flown successfully and is more powerful.

Former NASA administrator Bill Nelson believes SLS will survive, as Trump likely wants to be the president who oversees the next moon landing.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    27
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    “Critics favor SpaceX’s cheaper, reusable Starship”

    …yeah these critics definitely aren’t just Musk with a fake mustache and spacex investors or anything…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    7
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Ah yes, Elon Musk deciding who gets government contracts to build spaceships. Move along, no conflicts of interest to be seen here.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    69 hours ago

    Trump likely wants to be the president who oversees the next moon landing.

    Like this MF would last the 10 years that would take.

    • Ech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 hours ago

      Bruh, just let him believe it. Trying to argue against keeping NASA isn’t the best angle, atm.

    • @CouncilOfFriends
      link
      47 hours ago

      I also don’t see how President Musk would ever allow Trump to oversee it.

  • @Lasherz12
    link
    810 hours ago

    I don’t think this is a meaningful test because actually creating stuff for the money you get isn’t required when you have the power to devalue USD and your own companies’ stocks. This is literally the only reason he surpassed the other tech bros in wealth accumulation: market manipulation.

  • Pennomi
    link
    English
    49 hours ago

    Yeah, Starship is definitely not ready for primetime. Maybe cancel SLS after SpaceX has flown a Starship mission around the moon.

    • @MsPenguinette
      link
      59 hours ago

      It’s not the correct architecture for making it to the moon. Starship/SuperHeavy is an absolute beast for LEO but they are nowhere close to being able to make it to the moon with that system. I wish Super Heavy all the luck and success but it’s frustrating when they keep pushing it for other roles without acknowledging the major issues that come with staging so low in the atmosphere

      • Pennomi
        link
        English
        29 hours ago

        Agreed, though I’m still interested in some “assemble in orbit” lunar architectures. No need to lug the whole Starship out there, but it can put significant mass into orbit. You could build an Apollo style lander out of three or four launched components, I suspect.

  • TimeSquirrel
    link
    fedilink
    39 hours ago

    $24 billion Space Launch System (SLS), citing high costs and outdated technology.

    Fuck Musk, but they ain’t wrong. It’s just rearranged space shuttle parts designed to funnel pork barrel money to the same old contractors (except now we even gotta throw away all the RS-25 engines instead of reusing them). There’s nothing fundamentally new there that they didn’t already do in the 60s. It kind of is a step backward in terms of aerospace tech.